> In an apparent desperate attempt, Rich writes
>
> >It is not untoward to attempt interpretation of Genesis. The Talmudists
> and the Kabbalah both claim that Genesis contains allegories. This
> specifically
> >means that as far as the Jews are concerned, the true meaning is veiled
> and MUST be interpreted from the surface material and WAS NEVER meant to be
> read literally. Why don't we heed their opinions on their own written
> material?
>
> Sorry, Rich, this type of Christian nonsense requires a response. Please
> provide further evidence for your reasoning. In the meantime,
> you can consider me a Christian. The kind of Christian who believes all
> evidence against Christianity must be interpreted as an allegory
> and re-defined. In other words, a Christian who believes in absolutely
> nothing. For the sake of honesty, integrity, and fair play, though -
> please don't consider me a Christian.
>
> Jim Eisele
>
>
>

"In the Mishna (Haggiga, sec.2) we find this remarkable passage: The story of
Genesis (the Creation) is not to be explained to two men, the story of the
Merkaba (Heavenly Chariot) not even to one, unless he be wise and can deduce
wisdom of his own accord." p. 15, Adolphe Franke's The Kabbalah.
Franke continues:
It can be seen furthermore, that the secret doctrine comprised two parts,
which are not accorded equal importance; for one part may not be taught to
two persons, while the other may never be entirely divulged, even to one,
though he satisfy the severest conditions. If we are to believe Maimonides -
who although a stranger to the Kabbalah, could not deny its existence, the
first half entitled the "story of Genesis," taught the science of nature, and
the second half called the "story of the chariot," contained a treatise on
theology. This opinion was accepted by all the Kabbalists.
In order to be initiated into this mysterious and sacred science it was
necessary to be distinguished not only by intelligence and eminent position,
but by advanced age as well. Even when these conditions were fulfilled, one
was not always sure enough of his intelligence or his moral strength to
accept the burden of these formidable secrets, which might be dangerous to
one's belief and the observance of religious law.
A curious example of this is found in the Talmud itself, in ALLEGORICAL
language which is later explained."Four persons entered the garden of
delight: namely ben Azai, ben Zoma, Aher and R. Akiba. Ben Azai looked around
and died. Ben Zoma looked around and lost his reason. Aher made ravages in
the plantations. Akiba entered in peace and came out in peace...

We must therefore agree with the most reputable Jewish authorities that the
Garden of Delight entered by the four masters is nothing but the mysterious
science mentioned above - a science dangerous to weak intelligences because
it may lead either to insanity or to deviations more fateful than impiety.
Aher had been one of the wisest teachers in Israel... when he came out of the
ALLEGORICAL garden into which his fatal curousty had led him, he became an
open infidel."
-------------------------------------

Jim,

You are in Midian. I am not desperate. I have the evidence. It is reproduced
above for you. And I've cracked the mysterious science Franke talks about.
The implications are profound but you would resist them just as Aher did when
he ravaged the plantations. In fact, the true nature of the allegories is so
radical at first sight and so logical in retrospect, that it is just getting
over the shock of a new way of looking at things that keeps people from
emerging transformed on the other side. My interpetation is supported by
Kevin MacDonald, the evolutionary psychologist who wrote a trilogy on
Judaism. Do not be led astray when I cite Jewish or Persian or even Buddhist
sources. I am a better Christian for having gone the whole route because I
can say without a doubt that I know true religion after having sampled all
the rest.

What if I explained one of the allegories in Genesis for you? What if I
offered you the mysterious science that drives men mad? Could you handle it?
The interpretation of the allegory of the elder serving the younger in
Genesis is so important I wrote the national council of churches bible
translation unit this week to question a translation in some of their newer
Bibles, all because their translation does not conform to the correct
interpretation of the allegory.
If you or any one on the list would like a walk in the allegorical garden,
please write me off line.

Much of Genesis is allegorical. I didn't say false. I said the true meaning
is deliberately hidden. That's why I'm here.